poles our people have to climb so on the distribution of the policies there can be no impediments so that precludes a second light. we've contacted the staff about solutions of led lights are are focused back to the pedestrian areas. those are special facilities are don't believe they're more expensive than a street light installation but we're only to find solutions for the pedestrian lighting. i respect the pole access. for us we provide street light services as a service to the city in changing the lights that needs to be done at the request of the city. so we get the containment and do

the work. to the extent there's funding we're more happy to do that so long as they set the rules that the puc has created for us >> has b there been discussions with the puc trying to balance the need for access on those multiple use wooden poles that pg&e has with the upgrade of lighting that's an issue. >> we're trying to find a way to balance the requests. 70 thousand square miles long most of our other customers and perhaps in more rural areas are less willing to take on

imcredential costs. our customers don't want to make that kind of investment in the infrastructure >> supervisor jane kim. >> by the way, thank you for addressing some of my questions. i wanted to make sure i didn't have the presentation in front of me but the remittance for pg&e would have the capital cost improvements for over 5 years >> those increases are the improvements now but the cost of the service in san francisco. one of the things we pointed out in our earlier slides san francisco is very, very expensive to serve to look at the lights in the golden - those

folks expect those services as well as the fact we just have many kinds of different lights in san francisco. much more complex the money is going to improvements locally it's not just the rp program it's also the existing program of other equipment in san francisco >> one of my questions is since we're paying over time are you going to be advanced fronting so the bulk happens on the front end and we'll be paying you back over time. >> it's hard to describe it like that. we make investments across the city in regards to the funding for example, a $2,000 increase didn't mean we're going to do

more improvements we're going to do $8 million of improvement that's 12 years of rate increases in one year so so what's happening is per diem is hoping to make that commitment at some point >> then my second question do i need a history of the loops. >> i did not. like you said a majority of those are are on the west side as we reply replace those we're ordering those in a different way. inching we came in and said which lights are out more frequently. after yourself and supervisor campos we recognize that an outage in one area is not equal to an out angle in another area.

we wanted to cover the boarder benefits that exist to try to reflect the commitments to be responsive to operational needs >> this goes back to light light and district 6 has a lot of business improvement district. so when the cb ded put in their own lighting they don't budget that additional cost to maintain the lights within their own budget this is something that gets carried over by p&g and those power >> those light are i'm not sure one hundred percent so maybe i want to come up. >> they're the responsibility of sf puc though. >> i think so.

>> i am trying to understand. >> we're talking about the existing lights it maybe come to the those lights need to be replaced. there's cobra lights if the world were all cobra lights the cost would be lower but for speciality lights lib china town south of market street like the lights on the gold triangle there is more expenses >> maybe the first time or for maintaining it it comes from pg&e. >> that's correct. >> but the b.i.d. lights are funded by the b i did. >> not the lolts but before they were established.

>> and last question is the last slide the. >> current opportunity or current challenges. >> this is around using our system and the delays. >> oh, got it. >> the length. >> there you go. >> the legion system so that's our 311 system. >> right so per diem has their own system. what kari's staff does with is we close a light for legion arrest we have data we think the best data is reflect our employees that work on our system. legion is a third party check but when it's not reflects of reflective it casts a diagramer performance >> and legion is down a lot. >> legion has been down 3 times

in the loose three weeks. >> it's been down 3 times. sometimes, you know, 4 hours or more so it has compacted our ability to get do the system. that's a manual process like someone has to go in and do the work as opposed to the pg&e system as soon as they're done there's an automatic closer and my staff checks the quality and there's a gap in between >> and you give that - >> we e-mail the contact we have that he puc. >> that system is rub by 311 correct. >> yes. >> i'd love to see that data in terms of the number of temps times in the past year it's been

down. i agree 311 is one of our most important systems and it's troubling if not just in the last couple of weeks it's down regularly >> no problem. >> and since that's our discussion of puc staff they've been fantastic but they do exist and we should acknowledge them they're not impediments to our city but we need to fix them and finally, we have a number of opportunities about the lights to work to align ownership we're happy to have a discussion to discuss the next steps on those kinds of things. in their opinion working on those issues this is one of the most important things to align

ownership for one party being the owner and recognize the city to own the light but in district 2, 3 and 6 we can meaning fully impact the costs to the city >>. additionally we're working in our regulatory case at the puc to provide options to move to led lighting. the lighting lighting in san francisco is unique because we traditionally recover savings on the energy side as well as the operational side because even though it's owned and operated by pg&e it's harder for us to recover the costs. we're working to identify the facility charge for us to recover those costs and moved in

the led program. in addition we're looking at creating pilots not neighborhood of san francisco to have remote control in this hill we talked about before. as we work to replace the lights with the puc staff to make sure we're pitting in the right kind of lights when we replace a loop we have a meeting to discuss the scope of the work and identify any concerns they have. so with that if you have any questions, we'll be happy to answer them. and thank you very much >> supervisor kim. i didn't see the breakdown of pummeling and puc in district 6 it just says treasure island but if you know the answer >> i may be corrected but i

believe it's 98 percent city and two percent puc according to the slide. >> okay. thank you. >> thank you very much. okay. at this point we will begin public comment. i have 3 public comment cards if anyone else wants to make a public comment open item one fill out a card public comment will be 2 minutes >> thank you supervisors for this hearing and supervisor weiner for your ongoing interest on having the hearing. i've watched my schaffer in person and on sfgovtv and i've never felt like i'm in a parallel universe.

obviously it's a mess operationally with responsibility of ownership issues and financing. there's some plans and hopefully thoughts but i didn't hear a lot of concrete stuff. i'll share with you the experience of my neighborhood i'm the chair of the neighborhood midgets we represent about 45 hundred households around bonding invest park and pg&e is responsible for our lights. it used to take, in the morning two or three business days for pg&e to come out and fix a light. today, it's 15 to thirty days in exchange any statistics you've heard today. the dialyses and the communicate between 3i6 and pg&e in my

experience is non-exist. 311 can't telling tell you where pummeling is on. mr. smith to me personally has been polite but i shaunt shouldn't have to call a pg&e representative to get a street light fixed. there's been a lot of fingerpointing. its dangerous residential burglars and public safety is all been mentioned. there's a lot of work to do here thank you. >> thank you. next speaker, please good afternoon. supervisors. i'm angie i'm chair of the advisors board of the action group. we serve the commercial corridor on mission street between silver

and geneva and our focus is economic development beautification and public safety. we spend a lot of time working on street light issues. we've done a few hot spots we've need lights out on mission street and in the neighborhood as a whole. there are also a lot of lights out. we're very active and report them. i'm not adverse to moving sxhooeflz to make sure those lights are repaired. we're getting some pedestrian lighting installed around the pooesh triangle.

it took a lot of push and making sure it funded through one bay area grant and the county of transportation authority has to do with the mta and public safety and pedestrian safety and a traffic. i think it is important to get more street lights on the street lights 23450r7b9 who owns them. i think it's important that we get those led lights rolled out as soon as possible. as supervisor kim noted it makes a huge difference in public safety. thank you for your time >> thank you. and let me call the next few cards (calling names) >> supervisor weiner and kim and chewing thank you for this

hearing i'm with the community coalition. we've been which they recalled focused on this issue since a crime occurred under a burned out street light. i'm happy i think to report there's better communication between pg&e and puc. this thursday i used the street light sf app to report an obscured street light on our street that's totally blocked by trees. i know the app is buggy but make sure you get t the pin drop in the right place. i got response from pummeling right away and i'm going to follow-up to see when it's done. so i overcome dictation there.

on farrell street it's to focus the lighting on pedestrian thoroughfares rather than the tall street lights that could be blocked by trees as supervisor weiner pointed out. we appreciate our focus and we certainly hope the st. city can take over ownership of all the street lights for the repairs >> thank you. >> good afternoon. i'm executive director of liveable city. thank you for having this hearing. when we were working on the better street plan it was missing a piece it says someday we'll add those but it's an embarrassing failure the puc that coincident get it together

it's great to hear about the street light policy. the sidewalks need to be lit. until you have standards you're not going to be be able to do the industries. but if the standards don't exist i encourage you to keep puc's feet to the fire so we can have is city sidewalk standards. the other thing you might want to look at the governs of the program. there was an audit when mr. kelly was director and both of those looked at the street light lighting responsibility to the department of public works. it could help because public

works has most of the elements and the thing that hangs up is to get a lighting component done it's a different agency. so pg&e i'm public works is much better since the capital planning and it's much likelyer we'll get a good capital plan. you have to also look at combfrns but all those ideas of bringing those other city control to create good level of pedestrian street latin-american is important >> ms. schneider. >> thank you to pg&e and puc for your presentation. i'm nicole sxhird i appreciate

the opportunity to address street lights. supervisor weiner you talked about evangelical around pedestrian safety when we don't have lights on our sidewalks it's hard for people to see. it helps or sidewalk lighting helps to mitigate violence on our street and he helps our angling population preventing trips and a hazards just to make our sidewalks more walkable and safer. i'm glad there's conversation happening. traditionally we've about that focusing our street lighting on cars pedestrians don't have headlights. it's important to talk about the scale lighting. a lot of the conversation has been around infrastructure and i'd like to see some standards on how to proceed around

pedestrian scale lighting for both commercial districts and other areas where people walk which is everywhere. i love physical examinations conversation >> thank you, mr. hill. >> supervisor chiu and wiener and kim thanks for having this very much appreciated. >> i'm brian from the castro community. as you know, we continue to see a healthy level of property crimes in our area. a couple of my problems one i think it's taken way too along to get on board with lapd lighting. i see it in caltrans and freeway. the second thing is trees it's very frustrating that the need

to keep trees whatever they are trumpet this built of street lights to reach the stoplights. i asked for one tree to be r0e678d people scribbled on the sign. that's a nice plan but it shouldn't trumpet the need to deal with trees. tree trimming is something else we need to happen and tree removal where it presents a problem. to get permission when tredz need to go they need to go they can be planted everywhere. the number of lights out. i haven't had too many problems

with having lights repaired by they're not bright enough. we run into dark spots in the castro places. so thank you >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> hello, i'm susan i live on cap street and i'm a member of cap street neighborhood. during the heavy rains every light on cap street goes out. pg&e owns our street lights and pays the city to maintain them. if the city maintains them the goal would be in three or four days to repair them. our lights take modern three weeks to repair them. the reporting mechanism is frustrating. i call 311 they report to per diem after that that generate a

pg&e case no. then i can call pg&e to complain and ask for them to fix it. the pg&e rep never told me with it, be fixed. note our lights go out when it rains. the pummeling person told us to get even though street address and the pole serial number. this is difficult to do and the reason we're supposed to do this the street crew only works in the daylight. sometimes they tell us that our lights are old and we should expect this. i live two weeks from work when the lights don't work there's tripping hazards and car break-ins. if would be great if our lights

don't get repaired they get repaired quickly >> you're the dread series loop. >> yes. what mr. smith. >> i had a campaigns with supervisor campos office and of the two major outages this year there was won by a dig in by a city contractor. so our loop is not kausdz by nature failure but they will be fixed by the middle of next year >> okay. any additional public comment on item 1 the street light hearing. seeing none, public comment is closed. so again, i want to thank both the puc and pg&e for the useful

presentation and the public. i think we've seen improvement in terms of the average response time to repair 3wr7bd out lights that's been promising. you've seen comforted coordination among the knowing that and he pg&e and 311. there are some fundamental issues we need to those challenges are really a symptom they have old street light and significant capital needs for both systems. we have a continuing need to aggressively add important pedestrian grade lighting that's got to be a high priority as well as to complete the conversion to led lighting. we also need to a deal with the ownership issue the goal is to provide the most

stuff service in san francisco and it didn't make sense to split the ownership of the lights. so as i mentioned we're going to be working on at a minimum resolution but legislation to set clear policies about what are the policies with respect to street lights relating to a number of different issues. the better street plan as noted focuses on commercial areas and commercial corridor. we need to take a boarder citywide approach in particular when you get into residential areas there's not the same level of pedestrian foot traffic it can be more dangerous to have a darkened street to be a risk of crime or tripping whatever par so this is an ongoing conversation.

those are important assets that we've loud for too long and look forward to continuing work. supervisor kim >> thank you. i just want to thank the chair and a co-sponsors for bringing this hearing. i think it's important highlighted by the members of our constituents that came to speak today. a couple of things it's great to see the time as greatly improved. of the great alleviation to our resident i'm concerned about our 311 system this is the first time i've heard it breaks down that on a regularly basis bow for resident to be able to get an e-mail saying that complaint was bosz close out.

so i'm lost very interested in hopefully continuing conversations around light ownership. i think i'm particularly for the districts where the city owns a aviate majority of the lights in district 5 and 6 maybe we should talk about doing the transfer of the ownership and having a long term discussion about the rest. seems like at the end of the day we're still funding for the cost of improvements and maintenance. i guess there's a finest issue of how we can sped up that versus over time but it makes sense to me as a representative if all the lights were under one equity. and if it's frustrating for our office to know who owns the light it's for frustrating for the